A funny thing happened on the way to the Wall

[Hayabusa Rider]

Nope, at least not with misappropriated funds.

The purse is the responsibility of the House, not the usurper in Office.

 

[Jaskalas]

Federal judge blocks Trump from using Defense funds for parts of border wall

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

 

[dawp]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

isn't that basically what trump did with his emergency declaration?

 

[IronWing]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

This is what judges do everyday; it's their job. An issue should only go to the Supreme Court if it already hasn't been beaten to death by the Supreme Court. On the issue of misappropriating funds, the Supreme Court has already stomped that sucker flat and the Trump is patently wrong, knows he's wrong, and does it it anyway.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

Might brush up on the Constitution and Judiciary. Every judge has the power of the Constitution invested in them by design. Think about it this way- Let's have every action the DOJ takes personally reviewed approved by the US AG. Every. Single. One. How's that going to work? It's not. Then there's Congress. No committees handle business as they always have. Instead, it's the full House or Senate who must handle Every. Single. Issue.

That's nuts, but what you are "not fond of" is what you are arguing for, the complete inability of a Branch to function. The process is that "one man" makes a decision based on legal grounds with established precedent and law. The House has the power of the purse. That Trump violates that principle doesn't make the person upholding that principle wrong.

Of course, there is no "one man" scenario at all. An appeal may be had and heard BUT the lower court has to be wrong for that to happen. Trump might ask the SCOTUS and they let the lowest correct court decision stand and not hear the case because they have enough to do without doing someone's correct work all over again.

 

[zinfamous]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

2 options:

--you don't know how the judiciary branch works.
--you don't like the decision.

Which is it?

 

[DrDoug]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

Congress spends and says where, not the President. It's that simple, otherwise why would Congress even bother trying to set spending if the President could just do whatever he wants with the lump sum? Besides that, to set some straw on fire... this is the first judge to handle the matter. If it needs to go further up the chain, it will be appealed.

There is no "one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself", the judge just did their job. Now get an extinguisher, fast!

 

[Viper1j]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

Isn't the so-called president "one man"?

 

[darkswordsman17]

2 options:

--you don't know how the judiciary branch works.
--you don't like the decision.

Which is it?

Its D (with C being that's he's chosen to be stupid on this subject): All of the Above.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Isn't the so-called president "one man"?

Yeah, he didn't think that through very well at all. But then he rarely seems to so not terribly shocking that someone that regularly defends rampant bullshit by conservatives is a hypocrite while also being profoundly stupid in how they try to frame their stupid argument.

"No single man should get to determine this!" while he defends a single man having pushed it in the first goddamned place. At what point do they get so stupid that even they start to notice how poorly they frame their points?

 

[Sunburn74]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

Remember what kind of precedent this sets. If Congress says no and a president can declare a national emergency and get away with it, all sorts of fake emergencies will be created by future presidents whenever they don't get what they want.

 

[Viper1j]

Yep.. Watch them whine when gun violence is made a "National Emergency"..

Or climate change.

 

[Jhhnn]

This is what judges do everyday; it's their job. An issue should only go to the Supreme Court if it already hasn't been beaten to death by the Supreme Court. On the issue of misappropriating funds, the Supreme Court has already stomped that sucker flat and the Trump is patently wrong, knows he's wrong, and does it it anyway.

The judge stopped misappropriation from becoming a fait accompli prior to judicial review. Once it's done, it's done, and nothing can change that.

Fuck you, Libtards. Fuck your democracy and your rule of Law. Burn it down. Hail Trump, you stupid bastards. The Wall is the answer, to everything. All that reality stuff? Make it go away.

 

[feralkid]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
.

One who still thinks in 15th century terms.

 

[brycejones]

One imagines that a wall is the definition of defense.
I am not fond of one man, a single Judge, claiming the power of the Constitution itself. This decision... and resolution of this dispute... belongs at the SCOTUS.

This derp is beneath you.

 

[dawp]

no new segments of wall built, just replacements
https://www.newsweek.com/ann-coulter-trump-border-wall-1450655